Climate change is 'threat multiplier'

Severe drought. Record heat. Extreme storms. In the past year, the United States has experienced conditions that have already become commonplace in many of the most volatile parts of the world. But not until the day of his second Inauguration did President Barack Obama put climate change squarely back on the table, after a long presidential campaign from which the issue had been largely absent.

While the fact of climate change might be fodder for political debate, it is widely accepted across the national security community, which focuses keenly on reducing risk and preserving freedom. The CNA Military Advisory Board — a panel of our nation’s highest-ranking retired military leaders — has identified climate change as a “threat multiplier” because it can exacerbate political instability in the world’s most dangerous regions. Droughts, floods, food and water shortages and extreme weather can uproot communities, cause humanitarian crises and increase the chances of armed conflict. We believe these conditions make it more likely that U.S. troops will be sent into harm’s way — and the Department of Defense Quadrennial Defense Review, the National Intelligence Estimates and the National Security Strategy agree.

Story Continued Below

We saw the devastation caused by Superstorm Sandy — families without water, power and shelter. Superimpose on that kind of situation an already fragile political state, and you have a recipe for failed states and civil war. This is what the U.S. military is bracing for. That is why we are already actively engaged in planning against it. Just as sensible people plan ahead to minimize the damage from weather disasters, our nation must take precautions to reduce the risks of climate change.

You can continue to debate the cause if you want, but that doesn’t change the facts on the ground. The National Academy of Sciences has found that extreme weather events are increasing in number and severity and are linked to the warming caused by burning fossil fuels.

But there are multiple other compelling national security reasons to reduce our use of fossil fuels. Despite newly accessible domestic reserves of oil and natural gas, at current rates of consumption, the United States can never fully extricate itself from the global oil market and the bad actors who control it. Witness the saber rattling from Iran; all they need to do is sink a ship in the Strait of Hormuz — the world’s bottleneck for oil shipments — and they can send our economy and the world’s into significant turmoil. Our military is also dramatically affected by the gyrating world price of oil. Every $10 increase in the price of a barrel of oil costs the Department of Defense $1.3 billion. This is money taken directly from our fighting force.